On Mon, 27 Oct 2008, Alex Smith wrote: > On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 14:07 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > As is, I don't think there's a lot that can be done. The PRS was acting > not-in-accordance-with-expectations due to a mistake, so that can be > solved equitably, but the gamestate will have changed a lot in the > meantime. Technically speaking, BobTHJ's award of the second point to me > was ILLEGAL (although it worked), but a court case on that would have to > be UNAWARE, as at the time we both believed it worked.
I agree that criminal proceedings aren't reasonable, I'm more thinking of the equity; what is an "equitable" solution to making a mistake that resets all other members' points? I'm not too bothered with "gamestate changing" issues, equity is more interesting when you're finding recompense for things that "can't be put exactly back." In other words, is there more equity in the "worth" of the single point (one point) or the relative worth (the value of that point in how it changed all holdings and awarded a win). -goethe
